Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 7
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
the obama administration, i'm quoting him now, of a, quote, massive cover-up. let's bring in our pentagon correspondent barbara starr. she's working this story for us. how those are pretty stinging and strong words, barbara. >> reporter: absolutely, wolf. you know, the whole benghazi situation has already led to delays in confirming some of president obama's key appointees. chuck hagel at defense, john brennan at the cia, and now senator mccain saying he is not ready to call it a day on all of this. a congress hearing -- >> then you ought to have your facts straight. >> reporter: after congressional hearing. >> who responsible then? >> reporter: republican senator john mccain challenge, the white house on its response to benghazi. now he is going further on nbc's "meet the press." >> so there are many, many questions and we have had a massive cover-up. >> a cover-up of what? i'm just saying you, a cover-up of what? >> i'll be glad to send you a list of questions that have not been answered. >> reporter: the white house says it's given answers. conducted 20 briefings for congress. official
. as is widely recognized, sequestration over the next 10 years apply to the pentagon budget would only reduce it in inflation adjusted terms to what it was in 2007 a. the most powerful military in the world -- 2007, as the most powerful military in the world engaged in a war in iraq and the challenge in afghanistan. if members of congress pay attention to the facts, they will see a clear path to dramatically reduce pentagon spending without undermining america's position as being the most powerful nation on the planet. and nobody has done a better job of highlighting a path forward, an area of opportunity, than walter pinkus writhing on the pages of the "washington post" over the last couple years as he details the sweep of our nuclear weapons program and the spending trajectory. this morning's latest offering should be required reading for every member of congress and the ones who whine the loutest should be forced to read it -- loudest should be forced to read it twice. he details a vast array of nuclear weapons already deployed, ready to be deployed within 30 minutes, a relic of our conten
immediate to both operate inside the pentagon, and that's -- you heard robert gibbs, former press secretary yesterday say it was a little disconcerting watching him give those answers. they made a strategic decision not to have a debate with those republican senators. trying to not start fights, but was he too passive? >> there was a way to push back. david sanger, he could have said i disagree with you about the surge. senator mccain, you're my great friend, but let's talk about what's really going on. we have 66,000 troops at afghanistan right now. he didn't pivot. he didn't push back. he didn't fight. david brooks, your columnist in "the "new york times"" suggested to chuck this weekend that he should even go so far as saying to the president, mr. president, do you have second thoughts? should i withdraw? that's rather more than i would have expected at this point. >> you know, i think there were two remarkable elements to the testimony that former senator hagel gave. he seemed unprepared on basic issues. we were discussing iran before. he had a difficult time even articulating the presi
to some of the employees, civilian employees of the pentagon and some other places. the 85 billion in cuts is through the rest of the fiscal year through september 30th and we're not even talking a full year. it's 50/50 between the defense cuts and the discretionary am doestic spending cuts and the warnings that we're hearing from experts on national security are very severe and vehement. they have told us that this will be a very significant damage. >> let's put the list up here, alex. the white house put out this fact sheet yesterday on the most damaging effects of the cuts that are supposed to go into effect march 1st. 17,000 education jobs at risk. 70,000 kids being kicked off head start. nearly 400,000 mentally ill patients not receiving health care and small business loan guarantees being cut up to $540 million, roughly. the white house did not mention the massive military cuts. what was the strategy there? >> well, look. i think that for the white house, the strategy here is to emphasize that basically every american would be impacted in some way. if you emphasize defense cuts and i
that there is any role for the government beyond providing for defense and funding the pentagon. that is the view of some. it is not the view of the great majority of the american people. i think the president will propose -- nobody knows what the president will say -- i think he will propose lots of ideas about how we can support them -- to spur innovation in this country. the government has had an important role in basic research. i mentioned the national institutes of health. you have other agencies, in the energy sector or other sectors, that can help provide seed money for those sorts of things. host: the ranking democrat on the house budget committee, representative chris van hollen, our guest on a newsmakers. the "usa today" put it in one word, jobs. this is available online at usatoday.com. a point from joseph ramirez -- from inside "the new york times ," there is this -- a couple of other details from this piece -- from the body of this story -- two other points, first on the issue of immigration, the president will say that he intends to make good on his promised to revamp the nation's
, the president traveling to norfolk, virginia, an area have the with pentagon contracts and military construction and the navy shipyards. what are you looking for? guest: the most interesting things will be the votes in the house and senate. if democrats are able to win over a number of republicans to get a compromise through, that would really upset the equation. it would be very much unexpected. that is maybe our one chance to avert the sequester. more likely, it will be a vote were democrats -- where democrats put forward a plan but fails. then you'll see a lot of finger- pointing from both sides, with republican saying, democrats could not pass of planned. the democrats will say, republicans are the ones who blocked our compromise to be in the senate. -- plan in the senate. there'll be a lot of blame shifting. it will be interesting to see the one side or the other is able to garner a political advantage. host: justin sink from the hill newspaper. week untiling -- one sequestration -- will it matter? federal agencies to have some win room -- some siggle room -- wiggle room. -- in the "usa tod
. these are decisions that have to be calculated at the pentagon, and the political cost has to be evaluated in the white house. if you're going to do what you have to do fully and effectively. and if you can't have, yeah, can't have an operation. so if you're going to go that route you have to be fully committed to its success. >> please join me in thanking david phillips for a wonderful presentation, a preview of a great book. showing the relevance of your work and your ideas. thank you much. >> thank you, michael. [applause] >> and thank you all for being with us today. >> we are learning today the president obama has accepted the retirement of the longest serving leader of u.s. and nato troops in afghanistan, marine general john allen. he was the president's nominee to be supreme allied commander in europe. that nomination was on hold during a pentagon investigation into e-mails that general our exchange with a civilian woman who was linked to the scandal that forced general david petraeus to resign. general allen has since been cleared of wrongdoing. the "washington post" reporting that
of improving efficiency within the pentagon. i would say that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is focused on readiness and training, which is absolutely true. if you talk to the lawyers that work with the defense contractors, they think they will have a field day care and some had testimony last year that the legal hassles emanating from sequestration may eat up a lot of their savings. but beyond that, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. and what we do is try to develop capability to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can prepare for future contingencies. the point is that it does not just readiness. it hurts us in the real world today. there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration's savings for other more targeted savings so that you save this amount of money, you're still fiscally responsible, but you don't get defense and these domestic p
for the director of intelligence or the defense intelligence agency? and that is part of the pentagon? caller: the defense intelligence agency, we are under the dod. host: what are you hearing about your job? caller: because i am a civilian, i'm liable to be placed on furlough at least one day a week, potentially 22 days until the end of the fiscal year. unfortunately, paying my half of the rent with a roommate at $1,200 a month prior to facilities, i'm going to have many difficulties with living with another analyst, just trying to afford our rent, as well as part of any food or any other expenses. host: could you have taken a job in the private sector and made more? caller: absolutely. i got a college degree try to join the intelligence agency, because i intended to serve this country. i do not wear a uniform, but i go to work every day for the defense of this nation. host: steve, from maryland, part of the energy department. caller: i am a fairly senior person. i understand the plight of folks at lower levels. the point is i have been working for the federal government for about 32 years.
the pentagon more flexibility on how it implements those sequester cuts. more bill up next. stay with us. billy zane stars in barabbas. coming in march to reelz. to find reelz in your area, go to reelz.com >> announcer: broadcasting across the nation on your radio and on current tv, this is the "bill press show." >> bill: rosa parks has a new seat up-front on the bus. hey, good morning everybody. what do you say? here we go. thursday, february 28th. last day of the shortest month of the year. is this a -- no, that's right. 29th is when you have a leap year. it is a regular ole february. good to see you today on this regular ole day. no such thing as a regular ole day on the "full court press." you never know what's going to happen around here. thank you for joining us. hello, hello, hello, wherever you happen to be in this great land. we are there with you. we are there for you to talk about the stories in the news this morning. whether it's happening here in our nation's capital washington, d.c., around the country or around the globe we've got it covered. we'll tell you what's going on but
and democrats face a march 1 deadline to avoid billions in across-the-board spending cuts. the pentagon announced it will offer benefits to same-sex couples. in the senate is wrapping up work on the violence against women act. and the house will vote on a bill requiring the president to offer a plan to balance the federal budget in 10 years. good morning. we begin with your take on the leaked white paper from the white house just fine drone strikes on u.s. citizens overseas. nbc news reported on the memo monday night and it has gotten lots of reaction in washington. what are your thoughts? call -- we want to get your thoughts on social media as well on twitter or facebook. or send us an e-mail. we will get your thoughts in a moment. first, josh gerstein is joining us on the phone. here's your headline -- what was this memo? guest: this is a white paper that looks like it was derived from some confidential legal opinions that the opinions -- opinions that the justice department wrote that authorized drones or some other counter-terrorism operations to basically killed u.s. citizens overs
is that the pentagon signed deals before the end of the year worth about $5 billion to make sure that the money was flowing before the sequester. >> $400 billion for this one weapon program. >> that's a lot of dough. >> that is a lot of dough. the cover is "the once and future pope." rick stengel, thanks for being with us. >>> coming up next, the first pictures of olympian and double amputee sprinter oscar pistorius after he's accused of shooting and killing his girlfriend. this is a guy who was the hero of london, sort of the field-good story last summer. now he is in jail accused of murder. we're going to have the latest straight ahead on "morning joe." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. [ clears his throat ] by earning a degree from capella she'more iuniversity, isn't she? you'll have the
. the president following -- traveling to newport, virginia, an area happy with pentagon contracts, military construction, and the navy shipyard. what are you looking for? guest: the most interesting thing will be debates in the senate. if democrats are able to win over enough republicans to get a compromise deal through, that will really upset the equation. it would be very much unexpected. but that is maybe our one chance to offer the sequester at this point. more likely, it will be a vote where democrats put a plan forward, it cannot garner enough republican support, and it fails. a republican plan is put forward and also does not pass. the democrats control the senate. then, republicans will say the democrats could not pass a plan. the democrats will say, republicans have one to do what? they blocked a compromise plan in the senate. there will be a lot of finger- pointing, a lot of gamesmanship. it will be interesting to see if one side or the other is able to garner a political advantage. host: justin sink, who is following this story for "the hill" newspaper. >> here is a look at our
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)